"...I think that he has at least another 5 years of alimony to pay. That would put it at the halfway mark."
Isn't it peculiar that a woman who is perfectly capable of working can get "maintenance" from a man--according to some arbitrary, fatuous "formula"--but if there is no man available to squeeze it out of, then even if she is severely disabled she will find it almost impossible to get it from Social Security? Social Security routinely denies claims for disability payments, even from quadriplegics, telling them that they "can work"!
Could the explanation for this strange situation be that, once again, the man is always considered guilty (of owing his wife support) while the government insists that they don't owe anyone anything, unless the person desiring any such payment can prove it is owed?!
What would be wrong with a little consistency here? By this, I mean to let the same Administrative Law judges who make disability decisions for Social Security decide if a man owes his wife support, using the same tests, rules and standards--which they employ in deciding whether someone can work--in their normal hearings!!
NOTE: I HOPE THE ABOVE IS CLEAR AND THAT IT CAN BE CUT, PASTED AND FORWARDED TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT! THE MORE WHO READ AND UNDERSTAND IT THE BETTER!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
